CDM 2015 Core · Mandatory · Construction

Worker Consultation Record

The Worker Consultation Record documents that workers have been consulted and engaged on matters affecting their health, safety, and welfare as required by CDM 2015. It records topics discussed, feedback received, and actions taken in response. Regular consultation ensures workers can raise concerns and contribute to safer working conditions.

Last reviewed: 29 March 2026 — This guide reflects UK law as of this date. CDM 2015 Reg 14 remains current with no amendments enacted as of 29 March 2026. Next scheduled review: 29 March 2027.

Legal basis	CDM 2015 Regulation 14 (PC duties to consult and engage with workers); H&S (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (employer duty to consult all workers not covered by trade union safety reps)
Who must consult	Principal Contractor (Reg 14); every employer for their own workers (1996 Regulations)
Who must be consulted	Workers engaged in construction work on the project — including those employed by subcontractors, self-employed workers, and agency workers
When	In good time — before decisions affecting health, safety or welfare are made, not after
What it means	Genuine two-way engagement where workers can influence decisions — not just one-way information giving
Record required	Not explicitly mandated by name in CDM 2015 — but the record is the only evidence the duty has been discharged
HSE relevance	First thing HSE inspectors look for after an incident or on a routine inspection — lack of consultation records is a common enforcement finding

1. What Is the Worker Consultation Record?

The Worker Consultation Record is the documented evidence that the Principal Contractor — and every employer on site — has discharged their legal duty to consult workers on matters affecting their health, safety and welfare before making decisions about those matters.

Worker consultation is one of the most routinely neglected CDM 2015 requirements on UK construction sites — not because it is ignored entirely, but because it is confused with information-giving. Toolbox talks, briefings, and RAMS sign-offs are valuable — but they are not consultation unless workers have a genuine opportunity to influence the outcome. The record demonstrates that genuine consultation took place.

“14. The principal contractor must — (b) consult those workers or their representatives in good time on matters connected with the project which may affect their health, safety or welfare, in so far as they or their representatives have not been similarly consulted by their employer.”— CDM 2015 Regulation 14(b)

Two sets of regulations apply simultaneously

CDM 2015 Regulation 14 places a specific consultation duty on the Principal Contractor. The Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 place a separate consultation duty on every employer for workers not represented by trade union safety reps. Both apply on construction sites. In practice, the PC's Regulation 14 arrangements often satisfy both — but individual employers (subcontractors) must also ensure their own workers are consulted, and cannot simply rely on the PC's arrangements to cover their duties.

2. The Critical Distinction: Informing vs Consulting

This is the most important concept in this guide. Informing and consulting are not the same thing. The regulations require consultation — not just information-giving. Many sites fail this requirement not because they don't communicate with workers, but because they communicate in one direction only.

	Informing	Consulting
Direction of communication	One-way — from management to workers	Two-way — workers respond, raise concerns, and can influence the outcome
Timing	Can happen at any point, including after the decision	Must happen before the decision is made — ‘in good time’
Worker influence	None required — workers receive information	Workers must have a genuine opportunity to influence the decision
Legal standard	Information giving is good practice but does not satisfy the consultation duty	Consultation requires a genuine process, not just a presentation
Example (good)	Site manager briefs workers on new RAMS at a toolbox talk — this informs them	Site manager presents proposed working method for a confined space, asks for worker input, and adjusts the RAMS based on their experience of a similar job
Example (bad / non-compliant)	Manager tells workers ‘this is how we’re doing it, any questions?’ after the RAMS are already signed off	Consultation is not a tick-box exercise — going through the motions without genuinely considering worker input is not consultation

Signing a RAMS is not consultation

Requiring workers to sign a RAMS to confirm they have read it is information provision — it demonstrates the worker has been told about the hazards and controls. It is not consultation on whether the RAMS is adequate, whether the method is safe in practice, or whether there are hazards the RAMS has missed. Consultation on RAMS requires asking workers whether the method works in practice and whether there are risks not captured — before the RAMS are finalised and approved.

3. What Must Workers Be Consulted On?

CDM 2015 Regulation 14(b) requires consultation on ‘matters connected with the project which may affect their health, safety or welfare.’ This is deliberately broad. The following table covers the main topics that require consultation in practice.

Topic	Why consultation is required
Changes to the Construction Phase Plan	Significant changes to the CPP site rules, working methods, or safety arrangements must be consulted on before being implemented. Workers who carry out the work often have the most relevant knowledge about practical risks.
New or changing risks	Where the site risk profile changes — a new trade starts, excavation reveals unexpected ground conditions, a structural element behaves differently — workers must be consulted on how risks will be managed.
Safe systems of work and RAMS	Before approving a contractor’s RAMS or implementing a site-wide safe system of work, consult the workers who will follow it. Their practical experience often identifies gaps that management miss.
Welfare arrangements	Changes to welfare facilities — moving the canteen, adding or removing toilet provision, changing rest areas — require consultation with workers before implementation.
Personal protective equipment	Before specifying mandatory PPE requirements, consult workers on adequacy, fit, and practicality. PPE that workers refuse to wear or can’t work effectively in provides no protection.
Emergency procedures	The emergency plan and evacuation procedures should be developed with worker input, not just communicated to them. Workers must know the procedures — and consulting on them improves both quality and uptake.
Health and welfare arrangements	Arrangements for managing occupational health risks — dust, noise, vibration, manual handling, working in heat or cold — require worker consultation before implementation.
Working hours and rest arrangements	Where fatigue is a recognised risk, consultation on shift patterns and rest arrangements is required.
Appointment of worker representatives	Where workers are to elect representatives, the election process itself should be communicated and workers given the opportunity to participate.

What ‘in good time’ means

‘In good time’ means before the decision is made — not at the same time, and not after. If workers are consulted on a RAMS after it has been approved and submitted, that is not consultation in good time. The practical test is: could workers' input have changed the outcome? If the RAMS was already finalised when they were shown it, the answer is no — and that is not consultation. Build consultation into your workflow before finalising any safety document or working method.

4. Consultation Methods

CDM 2015 and the 1996 Regulations do not prescribe the method of consultation — only that it is genuine, timely, and enables workers to influence decisions. The following methods are all acceptable, proportionate to project size.

Method	Suitable for	Notes	Best for
Toolbox talks with genuine Q&A	All project sizes	Effective and proportionate for most site consultation. The key is genuine two-way exchange — workers must be able to raise concerns and have them considered, not just listen to a presentation.	Most common and practical
Pre-task briefings	All project sizes	Particularly effective for consulting on RAMS and specific working methods before a task starts. Workers who will carry out the work are consulted on the method before it is finalised.	Best for RAMS consultation
Safety committee meetings	Larger projects	Structured forum with elected or appointed worker representatives. Minutes should be kept. More formal but provides a systematic approach on complex or long-running projects.	Larger sites
One-to-one discussions	Small sites, sensitive issues	Effective for small teams or where individual concerns need to be addressed. Informal but should still be recorded.	Small sites
Notice boards / written consultation	All sizes, supplementary	Written information can complement face-to-face consultation but cannot replace it for matters requiring genuine worker input. Useful for sharing updated RAMS or procedure changes.	Supplementary only

5. The Worker Consultation Record — What to Document

CDM 2015 does not prescribe the format or specific contents of a worker consultation record. But the record must demonstrate that genuine consultation occurred — not just that a meeting was held. The following fields are required or strongly recommended for a record that would satisfy an HSE inspection.

Field	What to record	Status
Date	Date of the consultation — not the date the record was written up	Essential
Project / Site reference	Project name and site address	Essential
Topic consulted on	Clear description of the specific matter being consulted on — not just ‘general H&S’	Essential
Attendees / workers consulted	Names or roles of workers present, or confirmation that all workers on site were consulted. Signatures are best practice.	Essential
Information provided	What information was given to workers — RAMS presented, CPP section discussed, risk assessment reviewed, etc.	Essential
Worker contributions	What workers said — concerns raised, suggestions made, questions asked. If no contributions were made, note that explicitly.	Essential
Actions agreed	What, if anything, will change as a result of the consultation — RAMS amended, method revised, additional controls added.	Strongly recommended
Follow-up required	Whether any action requires follow-up, and by whom, by when.	Recommended
Record author	Name and role of the person who conducted the consultation and completed the record.	Essential

Recording worker contributions — even when there are none

One of the most important — and often omitted — fields is the worker contributions section. If workers raised no concerns or suggestions during the consultation, note that explicitly: ‘No concerns raised. Workers confirmed they understood the method and had no suggestions.’ This is itself valuable evidence — it shows that workers were given a genuine opportunity to contribute and chose not to. An empty contributions field looks like the box wasn't offered, not that workers had nothing to say.

6. Common Mistakes

Confusing toolbox talks with consultation

Toolbox talks that are one-way presentations — where workers are told what will happen and asked if there are any questions at the end — are information giving, not consultation. To be consultation, the toolbox talk must include a genuine opportunity for workers to raise concerns, suggest changes, and have those suggestions taken seriously. The record must capture this two-way exchange.

Consulting after the decision is already made

‘We’ve already approved the RAMS and ordered the equipment — we just need to brief the workers.’ That is not consultation. Consultation must happen before the decision so that workers can influence it. This requires building consultation into the project workflow — not as a post-decision briefing, but as a pre-decision input stage for safety-critical matters.

Not recording worker contributions

A consultation record that lists the date, topic, and attendees but has nothing in the ‘worker contributions’ field provides very weak evidence. An HSE inspector looking at a series of records with no worker input will reasonably conclude that genuine consultation was not occurring. Record what workers said — even if they said nothing, note that explicitly.

Only consulting the PC’s own workers and not subcontractors’ workers

CDM 2015 Regulation 14 requires the PC to consult workers engaged in construction work on the project — this includes workers employed by subcontractors, not just the PC’s own employees. Subcontractors’ workers are those most likely to have practical knowledge about the risks of their specific trade. Restricting consultation to office-based or management staff misses the people the regulation is designed to protect.

Treating consultation as a periodic form-filling exercise

Scheduling a monthly ‘worker consultation’ that covers generic topics regardless of what is actually happening on site is not meaningful consultation. Consultation should be triggered by real events — a new phase starting, a RAMS being finalised, a near miss occurring, site conditions changing. Frequency should match the pace of change on site, not a calendar.

Not acting on worker contributions

Consultation that never results in any change to plans is likely to be perceived — correctly — as tokenistic. Where workers raise genuine concerns, those concerns must be investigated and, where valid, acted upon. The record should note the action taken. Where a suggestion is not adopted, briefly note why. Workers who see their input acted on will engage more genuinely with future consultation. Workers who see it ignored will stop participating.

7. Related Documents

Document	Relationship
Construction Phase Plan	The CPP should describe the arrangements for worker consultation — who is responsible, how it will take place, and how records will be kept. The consultation records provide the evidence that the CPP arrangements are being followed throughout the project.
Risk Assessments / RAMS	RAMS consultation is one of the most important and most neglected forms of worker consultation. Workers should be consulted before RAMS are finalised — not just shown them afterwards. The consultation record should reference specific RAMS where they were the subject of consultation.
Site Induction Record	Site induction includes information-giving that often feeds into the consultation process. The induction should introduce the consultation arrangements — workers should know who to raise concerns with and how the process works. Induction records and consultation records are separate but complementary documents.
Accident / Near Miss Records	Near misses and incidents should trigger consultation on how the underlying risk will be managed going forward. The consultation record following an incident is particularly important — it demonstrates that workers were involved in identifying lessons and improving controls.

8. Frequently Asked Questions

Is a worker consultation record a legal requirement under CDM 2015?▾

CDM 2015 Regulation 14 explicitly requires the PC to consult workers in good time on matters affecting their health, safety and welfare. The regulation does not specify a ‘worker consultation record’ by that name — but without a record, there is no evidence the duty has been discharged. In practice, the record is essential. In the event of an incident or HSE inspection, the absence of consultation records is treated as evidence that the Regulation 14 duty was not being met.

Who should the PC consult — just direct employees, or all workers on site?▾

CDM 2015 Regulation 14 requires consultation with ‘workers engaged in construction work’ — this includes workers employed by subcontractors, self-employed workers, and agency workers on the project, not just the PC’s own employees. The regulation includes a qualification — in so far as they have not already been similarly consulted by their own employer — but the PC should not assume this has happened. In practice, consult all workers on site and record it.

Do toolbox talks count as consultation?▾

Toolbox talks can form part of the consultation process — but only if they include genuine two-way engagement. A toolbox talk that presents information and asks for questions at the end may satisfy the consultation duty if workers’ contributions are genuinely recorded and considered. A toolbox talk that is purely presentational is information-giving. The record is what demonstrates which it was — if the record has no worker contributions noted, it looks like a presentation, not a consultation.

What if workers don’t want to be consulted or don’t participate?▾

Workers cannot be forced to participate in consultation. But the PC must ensure the opportunity is genuinely available. If workers consistently decline to participate, record that the opportunity was provided and note that workers chose not to contribute. Consider whether the consultation format is appropriate — workers on construction sites often engage more readily with one-to-one or small-group discussions than with formal meetings.

Does the 1996 Consultation with Employees Regulations apply separately from CDM Reg 14?▾

Yes — both apply simultaneously on construction sites. CDM 2015 Regulation 14 applies specifically to the PC. The H&S (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 apply to every employer for their own workers not represented by trade union safety reps. In practice, where the PC’s consultation arrangements encompass all workers on site, this often satisfies both. But individual employers (subcontractors) remain responsible for ensuring their own workers are consulted under the 1996 Regulations.

Generate your Worker Consultation Record on Construction Suite

Construction Suite walks you through every required section with a guided Q&A — built to CDM 2015 Reg 14 — and generates a professionally formatted document in minutes.

Get started free